Or because, much like everyone else who decided to pop up and complain about the feminism arc and how the comic JUST ISNT THE SAME MAN. You're a huge douche.

Did I really do that? ...Man, my memory sucks, but I distinctively remember stating that the feminism thing wasn't a changing factor and that the important change had happened in the enviromentalist arc, which predates the feminist one by what? One year? Has to be close.

I also do remember stating that it was 'Nique that changed. Not the comic as a whole. I said that she had less personality... But did I really say that it was a bad thing?

I also think that I mentioned the fact that Tat is surely going somewhere with this and I'm anxious to see it.

Read, think and reply. I know that it takes more time than just replying according to what you assume you have read based on two or three words, but I assure you that it'll be worth it at the end.

Or because, much like everyone else who decided to pop up and complain about the feminism arc and how the comic JUST ISNT THE SAME MAN. You're a huge douche.

Did I really do that? ...Man, my memory sucks, but I distinctively remember stating that the feminism thing wasn't a changing factor and that the important change had happened in the enviromentalist arc, which predates the feminist one by what? One year? Has to be close.

I also do remember stating that it was 'Nique that changed. Not the comic as a whole. I said that she had less personality... But did I really say that it was a bad thing?

I also think that I mentioned the fact that Tat is surely going somewhere with this and I'm anxious to see it.

Read, think and reply. I know that it takes more time than just replying according to what you assume you have read based on two or three words, but I assure you that it'll be worth it at the end.

That bit where you complained about his audacity in having an opinion kind of implies you cared._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

Nah, not rebranding. The feminist movement can go its way, I'll go mine. I respect feminism, I respect the actions of several feminists, but I also choose to not call myself a feminist due to small but sufficient ideological differences. I can live with that.

A term so ingrained in popular knowledge shouldn't need rebranding. Repackaging (following Adyon's metaphor) should suffice.

Any objection to me considering myself both and equalist and a feminist then? Personally I would be more then happy to allow the overall equality movement to have yet more facets that work towards slightly different goals. It makes it all the easier to get people involved in things they really believe in.

Womenist theology is another related but divergent philosophy that I also fully support. I can accept that sometimes new groups do need to be made in order to draw focus to specific issues that are not addressed well enough in present movements... so long as those groups remain civil.

It's unfortunate that masculinists seem to feel the need fight feminists in all things, instead of realizing that we could be partners to the cause. Perhaps equalism could fair better._________________Deviant Art | Twitter | Tumblr

Y'know, folks, if we spend too much time and effort trying to figure out what to call ourselves, we're not going to change very many of the things we want to see changed._________________I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning

Y'know, folks, if we spend too much time and effort trying to figure out what to call ourselves, we're not going to change very many of the things we want to see changed.

Well, then, let's just agree that we should be called the People's Front of Judea!_________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

Any objection to me considering myself both and equalist and a feminist then? Personally I would be more then happy to allow the overall equality movement to have yet more facets that work towards slightly different goals. It makes it all the easier to get people involved in things they really believe in.

Womenist theology is another related but divergent philosophy that I also fully support. I can accept that sometimes new groups do need to be made in order to draw focus to specific issues that are not addressed well enough in present movements... so long as those groups remain civil.

It's unfortunate that masculinists seem to feel the need fight feminists in all things, instead of realizing that we could be partners to the cause. Perhaps equalism could fair better.

I mostly agree with your notes here.

Sadly, though, masculinism is, at this point, little more than a joke. Only themselves can be blamed for that, but yeah, that's how it is.

Isn't feminism all about equal rights? Sure, there's a focus on the rights of women in particular, but the general idea if you are a sane feminist is that, in an ideal World, gender differences are not a thing. So I guess being both a feminist and an equalist is semantically redundant.

Yeah, at the end of the day, though, there are lots of movements that are unaware of them all wanting more or less the same thing without realizing it._________________Welcome to Sinfest, the only place with a 46 pages long thread about sentient toasters

yeah, online masculinism is a joke, a large amount of it simply consists of hating on feminists and overt misogyny.

While you can find female supremacists online (go looking for the transphobic radfems, or rather don’t!) they are a small part of feminism and are busy marginalising themselves; looking at what passes for ‘men’s rights advocacy’ or the ‘men’s rights movement’, more often than not it looks like a male supremacist movement. (Don’t want to name sites, but they’re out there in the ‘manosphere’, and they’ve got considerably more engagement going on comparably, than the radfem sites within feminism.)

As you said, ‘the general idea if you are a feminist is that, in an ideal world, gender differences are not a thing’. The underlying biological differences between the group of male-bodied people and female-bodied people are small; there is more diversity within each group, than there are differences between the average of each group. So the usual social construction of genders that is built on top of that usually distributes gender rôles inequitably (for one egregious example, take the ‘men are good at math’ meme; my many women mathematics teachers would like to disagree with that): the only specific gender role that really should have any differentiation is the one determined by biology, i.e. only people with uteruses can bear children, and they should have complete bodily autonomy over that issue. All other gender roles are largely impositions thanks to culture, and while there might be good or inevitable cultural reasons why certain roles end up having gender imbalances, feminists think any person of any gender should be capable of and allowed to perform whatever societal role they wish to play. At the moment though, there are still barriers thrown up in the way of people of various genders to perform certain societal roles, and feminism would generally like all of these barriers to come down: one’s gender shouldn’t be a concern.

HEY LOOK, MORE DUDES DECIDING WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN A MOVEMENT DETERMINED TO MANAGE MORE EQUALITY OF CHOICE AND OPPORTUNITY FOR NON DUDES!

WHAT A FUCKING SURPRISE THAT THEY THINK THEY KNOW BEST ABOUT HOW IT SHOULD BE APPROACHED.

See, that's NOT cool. What you say there pretty much negates the concept of equal rights and puts it as a movement ONLY for empowering women, not equality, which isn't what most people here believe feminism is about.

Also, now you're personifying the movement more or less, equating the idea of a man contributing ideas to a man telling a woman what to do. It's not. Just because someone that's a man has suggestions? It's not that we're men deciding on birth control legislation and what women can do with their body and other fucked up shit like that. What I said was about improving public opinion without changing your ideals. Though, in Leohan's case I misunderstood. He was talking about a different movement concept and ideology differences, which is cool. I do like the way it feels, as it's easier to encompass race, religion, and other equality concepts as well.

I still considering myself a feminist...Like LadySunami said, we can have more than one thing we believe in. Even if they do overlap. When I think about what Leohan said how many different movements share the same goals but fight with one another...It's just so sad that people can't come together to work on things without shit flinging._________________ My Art

Adyon, nice of you to intervene again, except that’s not what happened back on the previous page of the discussion: when people like yourself and Leohan explicitlyposition yourselves outside the feminist movement entirely by saying things like ‘feminism as a label has been trashed by the mainstream media’ and that instead you’re in favour of identifying under a label that hasn’t been by tarnished by bad association, “equalist”, then you’re giving up your right to have any say over whether feminists are doing the best job of their own advocacy. And that’s what Monkey criticised you for: thinking you can stand outside feminism and still believe you have a say in how it’s run. If you’re not a part of it, you’re not a part of it. If you want to be a part of it, then be prepared to stand up for it too. Criticism from outside ≠ a say in directing others’ advocacy. So thank you, but rebranding feminism isn’t going to happen: witness how many different qualifiers go on the front of feminism (radical feminism, intersectional feminism, etc) and yet it’s still feminism.